Analysis of Celtics Games, '21-'22 Season

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Lack of talent and a bad mix of talent. The latter is odd since most of us thought the pieces to the puzzle fit much better this year than last. At least before the start of the season. We all knew about the DS/MS/JRich redundancy too but figured it'd be ok because it's not the Oompa Loompa gang. I was looking forward to this year. I figured even if they were a 44-45 win team, they'd at least be enjoyable to watch. Nope.

Grant Williams is the C's one bright spot this year. That about sums up the C's season so far.

I still assume the problem is shooting. I'll keep assuming that until they actually get shooters and continue to lose.

It's odd because this team could actually use a Lou Williams and the problem in years past is the team had too many Lou's.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,461
Somewhere
I can't pinpoint the cause but there's no way the Celtics are going to be successful with Jayson Tatum having his worst season in 3 years.

A lot of problems stem from that.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,095
I can't pinpoint the cause but there's no way the Celtics are going to be successful with Jayson Tatum having his worst season in 3 years.

A lot of problems stem from that.
Could Jayson Tatum's struggles be due to the construction of the rest of the roster?
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,271
Lack of talent and a bad mix of talent. The latter is odd since most of us thought the pieces to the puzzle fit much better this year than last. At least before the start of the season. We all knew about the DS/MS/JRich redundancy too but figured it'd be ok because it's not the Oompa Loompa gang. I was looking forward to this year. I figured even if they were a 44-45 win team, they'd at least be enjoyable to watch. Nope.

Grant Williams is the C's one bright spot this year. That about sums up the C's season so far.

I still assume the problem is shooting. I'll keep assuming that until they actually get shooters and continue to lose.

It's odd because this team could actually use a Lou Williams and the problem in years past is the team had too many Lou's.
The main problems with the roster right now (among the top 8 who actually play) are a lack of shooting and another “connector”. It really sucks to type this out but Gordon Hayward would be pretty damn perfect for this team
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
New coach, new system, new way of playing. I think they are going to give it more than 27 games before they give up on JT or JB. Anyone else is probably fair game but they likely aren't bringing anyone back that will move the needle.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Yeah, if BS was still the coach, he'd might be looking for a job really soon. Ime is safe at least for this year, if not next as well. If they finish like 30-52, I could see him being fired. I don't see them finishing 30-52.
 

Rook05

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
3,115
Boulder, CO
So, what's the fix? Someone has to get dealt right?
I think they might seriously consider moving Jalen. He’s my favorite Celtic and I think can coexist with Tatum. But they may feel different, and I’m starting to doubt his availability.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,095
Ime can talk about effort, intensity, et al, all he wants. It's a fair alternative to talking about the real cause, which is that the talent on the roster is what it is. Better players score more and play better defense, even when their effort isn't 100% all the time.

Stevens cleaned up the spill on aisle 4 that needed to be done last summer, but he just didn't have the paper towels to clean up aisles 5 thru 9. We'll see what happens over the coming 2 months.

EDIT: My aisle numbers do not refer to roster spots.
JaVale McGee just ran circles around our frontcourt lol. It is much more about effort, motivation and a team that is lost right now than it is about talent.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,095
New coach, new system, new way of playing. I think they are going to give it more than 27 games before they give up on JT or JB. Anyone else is probably fair game but they likely aren't bringing anyone back that will move the needle.
The problem since the summer has been the new coach trying to implement his new system and new way of playing onto personnel that doesn’t fit his vision of how he wants his team to play. I’m beginning to question Stevens interview process and how this all went down to get us to where we are now. Surely Brad knew that this is what Ime wanted to do and HAD to know it was an awful idea knowing his personnel. None of this makes any sense.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,474
Melrose, MA
The problem since the summer has been the new coach trying to implement his new system and new way of playing onto personnel that doesn’t fit his vision of how he wants his team to play. I’m beginning to question Stevens interview process and how this all went down to get us to where we are now. Surely Brad knew that this is what Ime wanted to do and HAD to know it was an awful idea knowing his personnel. None of this makes any sense.
I think this take assumes too much and ignores contrary evidence. The Celtics have managed a couple of impressive wins this year on their way to an unimpressive 13-14.

What we're seeing from them, results-wise, is basically no different than what we were seeing last year, under different coach/different system. At the close of the Brooklyn series, if any of us had been told the Celtics (36-36 last year, before winning a play-in game and losing ti Brooklyn in 5) were going to be 13-14 after the first third of the season, we would have thought "more of the same from coach Brad and his Celtics," not "must be a new coach forcing a new and ill-fitting system on the team."
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
I think this take assumes too much and ignores contrary evidence. The Celtics have managed a couple of impressive wins this year on their way to an unimpressive 13-14.

What we're seeing from them, results-wise, is basically no different than what we were seeing last year, under different coach/different system. At the close of the Brooklyn series, if any of us had been told the Celtics (36-36 last year, before winning a play-in game and losing ti Brooklyn in 5) were going to be 13-14 after the first third of the season, we would have thought "more of the same from coach Brad and his Celtics," not "must be a new coach forcing a new and ill-fitting system on the team."
This. We don't need talk radio narratives by outsiders (like all of the awfully biased knights of the keyboard) to explain what is going on.

This is a roughly .500 roster over more than a full NBA season, with two different coaching regimes and front offices. What more evidence do you need that not even [insert name of best coach ever] can close the talent gap this team has versus the league's top sqauds?

Maybe Stevens and Udoka are both league average or worse but there are actual team factors that correlate to winning where Boston is definitively bad.

Finally, most NBA pundits and most people here seem to agree that talent can typically overcome mediocre or even poor coaching. If the Cs are truly underperforming their talent level - and I think that position should be supported by evidence - what is Udoka doing wrong from a macro standpoint? Are shifting minutes and rotations with the current roster going to meaningfully change this team's ceiling?
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If the Cs are truly underperforming their talent level - and I think that position should be supported by evidence - what is Udoka doing wrong from a macro standpoint? Are shifting minutes and rotations with the current roster going to meaningfully change this team's ceiling?
The evidence might suggests he's overachieving, depending on your take of the Jaylen and Jayson duo.
-Jayson Tatum having his worst season to date
-Jaylen Brown has missed 14 games
-JRich and TL have missed 7 games each.
-The team is only 7 deep to begin with, with Grant on the fringes.
-The team is 13-14 despite all this.

If the team was healthy and Tatum was having a normal year, an optimist could argue the C's would be closer to 17-19 wins.
The realist would say 15-16.
The pessimist (or even realist )would say they'd have the same record regardless because the Jays have been playing .500 ball for 2 years.
I guess someone could argue they'd be even worse if they were healthy, though I haven't seen anyone.

This year, the C's are 7-7 without Brown, 6-7 with. For the 20/21 season, they were 6-8 without Brown, 30-28 with. So over the last 1 1/3 seasons, the C's are 36-35 with Brown, 13-15 without. It's only 28 games and it probably means nothing (a .500 team is going to have close to a .500 record in most situations), but it's amazing how little impact he had on the C's win/loss record.

Last year, the C's were 2-6 without Jayson Tatum.

I don't buy into the Jays can't play with each other argument but I may buy into the Jaylen Brown doesn't really move the needle enough for a 2nd star argument if someone was pretty convincing about it. Maybe having Jaylen Brown play makes it harder to involve others because he's kind of a black hole. JRich has been playing his best ball off late and it happens to coincide with Brown being injured. DS too, to an extent.

I'm glad more people are starting to come around on the lack of talent being an issue. The next obstacle is to get people to consider that Jaylen Brown might be the issue. Even if dismissed 2 seconds after.

Here's a question I think is fair and avoids all the "Can the Jays play together" debate.

How good would an NBA team be where Jaylen Brown was their best player? mid lottery or top lottery, right? He's an interesting player but how much of a difference maker is he, really? He scores points very efficiently. What else does he do? Maybe the C's would be better off with someone more well rounded at the expense of efficiency. If the team finishes close to .500, and is a 1 and done in the playoffs, they have to at least consider trading Jaylen.

edit: Or add someone better than Brown and push him down to 3rd star.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
5,867
I'm honestly starting to think the same way about Jaylen - the bottom line is, he doesn't make the people around him better. He's very efficient, but he's not all-world efficient, and given what a poor playmaker and distracted team defender he is, the Celtics have to be wondering how to better complement Tatum.

I'm fine with Jaylen being a second banana, and there are a lot of teams that would love to have his scoring on the floor for them. The problem is our first banana struggles with some of the same things Jaylen does. If Tatum never makes a leap as a playmaker, the Celtics are going to have to find someone who can really run the offense. Trading Jaylen might be the fastest way to get there.

But they might also not need to trade him to get a third star. I'm sure they'll try to get this group healthy before they give up on this pairing.
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,181
To pile on, it’s fair to wonder whether he’s more of Microwave-6th man. If his job is to be lead scorer of a second unit, his deficiencies don’t show up as much.

Bring him off the bench with JRich/Grant/Kanter/PP and you’ve got a high-scoring zone-D kind of thing for 5-7 minutes a half.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Regarding Brown, its clear they need to consider moving him as he is probably their most valuable trade asset unless they want to truly reset and deal Tatum. However the bar for a Jaylen Brown trade is probably not "do something, do anything to change things!" and is more likely a "if another star becomes available" type of thing.

Put differently, a Jaylen trade for some rotational depth is not near the same thing as an opportunistic trade for another disgruntled star.

If I had to guess, the "culture change" trade or however its spun will involve any of the others except maybe Horford. He doesn't feel untouchable but absent another team asking specifically for him, it feels they need his services. But Smart, Richardson, Schroder, Grant etc should all seem like candidates to be moved in a my loose change for yours type of trade.

As a side note, I suspect that if they deal anyone, people will have regret, especially if the player(s) is more suited to their new role than what they had in Boston.
 

Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
2,768
Boston, MA
To me, as Marcus Smart goes, so goes this team. And Bad Marcus shows up just too often. He really does seem to be the heart of the team and that is not a great thing when he is so inconsistent.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Regarding Brown, its clear they need to consider moving him as he is probably their most valuable trade asset unless they want to truly reset and deal Tatum. However the bar for a Jaylen Brown trade is probably not "do something, do anything to change things!" and is more likely a "if another star becomes available" type of thing.

Put differently, a Jaylen trade for some rotational depth is not near the same thing as an opportunistic trade for another disgruntled star.

If I had to guess, the "culture change" trade or however its spun will involve any of the others except maybe Horford. He doesn't feel untouchable but absent another team asking specifically for him, it feels they need his services. But Smart, Richardson, Schroder, Grant etc should all seem like candidates to be moved in a my loose change for yours type of trade.

As a side note, I suspect that if they deal anyone, people will have regret, especially if the player(s) is more suited to their new role than what they had in Boston.

I wonder how many people would be on board with a Sabonis + Brogdon for Brown and one of Smart/JRich trade in the off season. That probably requires trading Al or TL, though not necessarily. They can just let Al expire.

I could see both sides hanging up or saying yes. I could see people ranking Sabonis higher than Brown or as low as a fringe top 40 player.

Unlike other made up trades, Sabonis actually is on the block.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
To me, as Marcus Smart goes, so goes this team. And Bad Marcus shows up just too often. He really does seem to be the heart of the team and that is not a great thing when he is so inconsistent.

if role players are having more of an impact on the outcome of games than the star players, you need better star players.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
5,867
To me, as Marcus Smart goes, so goes this team. And Bad Marcus shows up just too often. He really does seem to be the heart of the team and that is not a great thing when he is so inconsistent.
I think the issue is and always has been role. He's asked to do too much by the offense. As a complimentary passer, he's very useful. When this team had Hayward and Kyrie out there, he was happy to take a back seat.

I wish he could be 6th man and do a Tony Allen thing, but as things stand he's one of the only guys who can get the ball moving on offense.

I wonder how many people would be on board with a Sabonis + Brogdon for Brown and one of Smart/JRich trade in the off season. That probably requires trading Al or TL, though not necessarily. They can just let Al expire.

I could see both sides hanging up or saying yes. I could see people ranking Sabonis higher than Brown or as low as a fringe top 40 player.

Unlike other made up trades, Sabonis actually is on the block.
How much do you think that would really change things? I think conventional wisdom on here would say Jaylen is the best player in that deal, but Sabonis can actually pass and is having an absolutely bonkers season from an efficiency standpoint. Brogdon would obviously replace some of Jaylen's shooting.

I don't think the Celtic's defense would suffer much, if at all, and I think the offense would hum much better. As long as one of TL or Horford is out there and Tatum continues to be better on defense, Grant continues to be useful, etc, they should be very good on that end.

On the other hand, you're giving up on Jaylen's upside - I happen to think he's reached it, but I know others still hope he might take another step up.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
I think the issue is and always has been role. He's asked to do too much by the offense. As a complimentary passer, he's very useful. When this team had Hayward and Kyrie out there, he was happy to take a back seat.

I wish he could be 6th man and do a Tony Allen thing, but as things stand he's one of the only guys who can get the ball moving on offense.
This is exactly where I am with Smart. I truly wonder how much anti-Smart sentiment exists because since being drafted, he has mostly been one of the Cs best four or five players and often amongst their best three - and while he has some elite skills, they are pretty specific. On an optimal roster, a player with his profile would have a much narrower role. He simply isn't good enough to be your third banana barring some weird hybrid lineup. Marcus seems to be pretty candid about knowing he isn't a good shooter based on recent comments (not the jokey ones from the off-season) but my sense is that him forcing shots is a response to others not stepping up versus some belief that he is about to become another Curry family member.

In short, Marcus Smart hasn't yet found his place in the NBA imo. Maybe it will never happen but ideally some team will use him properly and for those of us not scarred by watching him play in Boston, it will be both painful and inevitable.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
if role players are having more of an impact on the outcome of games than the star players, you need better star players.
THe issue with Marcus is... he's the exact wrong type of player to be getting significant minutes on a team with 2 stars, beause he brings no spacing but also isn't a rim protecting big. That's probably okay if you had 3 stars, but 2?

Also I'm sure part of it is... the coach and President both call him the heart and soul of the team... which gives him the greenlight to consider himself important on an off the court. Marcus needs to go, I just don't see how you build a Championship team with him
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
How about this - as Marcus Smart goes, the Cs goes? Reading the comments about MS intrigued me enough that I looked at his game log this year (it did not intrigue me enough to look at past years). And you know what? There's a correlation between Marcus being positive for the game and the Cs winning. Yeah, there are a couple of misses along the edges - he was +1 against NYK opening night (but the Cs probably should have won that); he was +3 when the Cs lost to WAS the first time; and he was -1 against TOR on the 28th when the Cs won by 12 - but the only time his +/- didn't reflect the final score was against CLE the first time where he was +12 and the Cs lost.

To me, this makes some intuitive sense. When Smart is good and he's taking good shots, he can be really positive through playing great defense, moving the ball, and making hustle plays and is exactly what this team needs. But when he isn't good - turning the ball over; taking terrible shots - he really hurts the team.

Then there's the follow-up question of even if the above correlation holds true, maybe the point is that Marcus gets exposed against better teams.

To me, the problem with evaluating Marcus is that while he makes plays that contribute to winning, he also makes plays that contribute to losing. I can't think of another player who runs as hot or as cold as him. Which may have a good bit to do with the Cs inconsistency.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
How about this - as Marcus Smart goes, the Cs goes? Reading the comments about MS intrigued me enough that I looked at his game log this year (it did not intrigue me enough to look at past years). And you know what? There's a correlation between Marcus being positive for the game and the Cs winning. Yeah, there are a couple of misses along the edges - he was +1 against NYK opening night (but the Cs probably should have won that); he was +3 when the Cs lost to WAS the first time; and he was -1 against TOR on the 28th when the Cs won by 12 - but the only time his +/- didn't reflect the final score was against CLE the first time where he was +12 and the Cs lost.

To me, this makes some intuitive sense. When Smart is good and he's taking good shots, he can be really positive through playing great defense, moving the ball, and making hustle plays and is exactly what this team needs. But when he isn't good - turning the ball over; taking terrible shots - he really hurts the team.

Then there's the follow-up question of even if the above correlation holds true, maybe the point is that Marcus gets exposed against better teams.

To me, the problem with evaluating Marcus is that while he makes plays that contribute to winning, he also makes plays that contribute to losing. I can't think of another player who runs as hot or as cold as him. Which may have a good bit to do with the Cs inconsistency.
The C's are 13-3 when Tatum is +. 0-11 when he is -.

I bet if you look at a lot of players records with + or -, they will look similar. It just makes logical sense. If Tatum is +22, chances are the C's played well and the other starters are + too.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If anyone wants to argue it's not the stars who determine the outcome of games, that's a pretty damning statistic to suggest otherwise.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
11-1 with DS +, 1-8 --, 0-1 neutral.
5-3 with JB +, 1-4 -
8-2 with Horford +, 3-10 -
7-4 with TL +, 2-5 -, 1-0 neutral
7-1 with JRich +, 3-8 -, 1-0 neutral
12-3 with Smart +, 1-9 -, 0-1 neutral

Yeah.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,185
THe issue with Marcus is... he's the exact wrong type of player to be getting significant minutes on a team with 2 stars, beause he brings no spacing but also isn't a rim protecting big. That's probably okay if you had 3 stars, but 2?

Also I'm sure part of it is... the coach and President both call him the heart and soul of the team... which gives him the greenlight to consider himself important on an off the court. Marcus needs to go, I just don't see how you build a Championship team with him
I think he can absolutely be part of a championship team...but he can't be the alpha on a championship team. And he's the alpha on this team, which is a problem...
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
I think he can absolutely be part of a championship team...but he can't be the alpha on a championship team. And he's the alpha on this team, which is a problem...
I think he could be ON a championship team, I don't think you can build a Championship team with him. He's a guy who would be great if he was on say GS or something where he's got an all-time great and a bunch of other stars, BKN or something. He's not a guy you want as part of your core as you try to get to the title
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Yeah, if BS was still the coach, he'd might be looking for a job really soon. Ime is safe at least for this year, if not next as well. If they finish like 30-52, I could see him being fired. I don't see them finishing 30-52.
If Boston went 30-52 and won the #1 pick then Ime would be safe. But aside from that, yeah. If this team is so lost that they only win 30 games then they’ll be on to a runner up in the last search.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
The C's are 13-3 when Tatum is +. 0-11 when he is -.

I bet if you look at a lot of players records with + or -, they will look similar. It just makes logical sense. If Tatum is +22, chances are the C's played well and the other starters are + too.
So maybe we should be talking about how to fix Tatum instead of more "well 28 games tells us nothing whatsoever, but let's trade Brown" shit again.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
So maybe we should be talking about how to fix Tatum instead of more "well 28 games tells us nothing whatsoever, but let's trade Brown" shit again.
28 games w/o Brown. We have a much bigger sample size of Tatum and Brown playing .500 ball together.

Oh well, more people are coming around to the idea that Brown is the problem. Hope you get used to the conversation because there's going to be a lot of it.

Brown is incredibly overrated and Tatum is better. If you have to move one, it's pretty clear which one you move.

If you think standing pat is the way to a title, that's cool. I think it's the way to more .500 basketball. They need to acquire a 3rd star on the cheap or they need to move Jaylen Brown. Otherwise, they'll just be the Trailblazers.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
What does Jaylen Brown do besides score? No one bothered to answer.

edit: The C's are 49-50 the last 2 years. Is that too small a sample size? does it not tell us anything? When does it?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
At this point, I hope that you guys get your wish. I'm tired of hearing about how this will help. Seems like a lot of "we need to do something" talk.

It's pretty obvious that Tatum and Brown at the top of the roster aren't a championship roster. Danny knew this, because he tried to bring in other studs during this whole Jay run, Al, Kyrie, Hayward, Kemba, etc. He chased the AD white whale. God knows who else he was kicking the tires on. Who the hell is saying that this roster is enough? I'd just love to hear the last time that someone did a liquidation deal and traded quality for quantity and was psyched to have done it. Nobody has answered that question either.

Keep throwing out quarter for two dimes trades, if that floats your boat. I've been holding out for one that sounds good though.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
At this point, I hope that you guys get your wish. I'm tired of hearing about how this will help. Seems like a lot of "we need to do something" talk.

It's pretty obvious that Tatum and Brown at the top of the roster aren't a championship roster. Danny knew this, because he tried to bring in other studs during this whole tenure, Al, Kyrie, Hayward, etc. He chased the AD white whale. Who the hell is saying that this roster is enough? I'd just love to hear the last time that someone did a liquidation deal and traded quality for quantity and was psyched to have done it. Nobody has answered that question either.

Keep throwing out quarter for two dimes trades, if that floats your boat. I've been holding out for one that sounds good though.
We just have different opinions on players, mostly because you have a far higher of Jaylen Brown than I do.

I think he's closer to a top 40 player than top 20, and I wouldn't classify Sabonis as a dime. We have no idea who else may become available this offseason, either. I'm also not the GM, it's on BS to get creative and fix this mess. He doesn't have a lot of assets to work with either.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
He chased the AD white whale.
I make Demon Kyzuzu jokes all the time, but in all honesty it was the pursuit of Anthony Davis that derailed the franchise. Once AD hired LeBron as his agent, Ainge should have realized that the jig was up and begun moving on. I suspect that half the reason he held on to Kyrie after Irving had agreed to terms with the Nets (EDIT: Irving agreed to terms with Brooklyn in December of 2018 per Spencer Dinwiddie) was the hope that Irving would convince Davis and himself that teaming up in Boston was the surest road to a title. Trading Irving in the fall of ‘18 would have gone a long way to shoring up the roster.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,271
At this point, I hope that you guys get your wish. I'm tired of hearing about how this will help. Seems like a lot of "we need to do something" talk.

It's pretty obvious that Tatum and Brown at the top of the roster aren't a championship roster. Danny knew this, because he tried to bring in other studs during this whole Jay run, Al, Kyrie, Hayward, Kemba, etc. He chased the AD white whale. God knows who else he was kicking the tires on. Who the hell is saying that this roster is enough? I'd just love to hear the last time that someone did a liquidation deal and traded quality for quantity and was psyched to have done it. Nobody has answered that question either.

Keep throwing out quarter for two dimes trades, if that floats your boat. I've been holding out for one that sounds good though.
Exactly. This team needs another top 30 player, not just swapping one for another. Ideally, it would be a shooter with an alpha personality..but I honestly have no idea who that player is. I think we can all agree that the Marcus Smart as the “heart and soul”/leader experience needs to stop ASSP
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
It's pretty obvious that Tatum and Brown at the top of the roster aren't a championship roster. Danny knew this, because he tried to bring in other studs during this whole Jay run, Al, Kyrie, Hayward, Kemba, etc. He chased the AD white whale. God knows who else he was kicking the tires on. Who the hell is saying that this roster is enough? I'd just love to hear the last time that someone did a liquidation deal and traded quality for quantity and was psyched to have done it. Nobody has answered that question either.

Keep throwing out quarter for two dimes trades, if that floats your boat. I've been holding out for one that sounds good though.
Danny brought in Al, GH, KI, and KW because JT and JB were young and cheap and he had cap room, not necessarily because they weren't "good enough." Maybe if you'd said, they weren't "experienced enough," I might agree with you more.

I think we all agree that the current iteration of JT is probably not good enough to be the best player on a championship team and the current iteration of JT and JB are likely not enough to form a championship team. However, the issue is how much better can they get or have they peaked?

Maybe that's what this year is about.

Definitely agree with you about trading quarters for two, three, or even four dimes. The Cs need a third star, not move on from one they have IMO.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,152
San Francisco
11-1 with DS +, 1-8 --, 0-1 neutral.
5-3 with JB +, 1-4 -
8-2 with Horford +, 3-10 -
7-4 with TL +, 2-5 -, 1-0 neutral
7-1 with JRich +, 3-8 -, 1-0 neutral
12-3 with Smart +, 1-9 -, 0-1 neutral

Yeah.
Glad we could rediscover here that a positive team differential over 48 minutes is highly correlated with team differentials over various large samples of 48 minutes. This doesn't support any thesis to me besides that teams win when their players play well. Which is not an insight at all.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,461
Somewhere
Glad we could rediscover here that a positive team differential over 48 minutes is highly correlated with team differentials over various large samples of 48 minutes. This doesn't support any thesis to me besides that teams win when their players play well. Which is not an insight at all.
I was hoping someone would write this more delicately than I could.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,095
While the jury is out whether Tatum can be the best player on a championship caliber team, he can at least be the #1A. And it's highly unlikely the Celtics will luck into a player better than him anyway, so they might as well ride the Tatum train and find out. And Wyc has zero interest in taking the Thunder approach anyway.

Brown will probably never be the #2 player on a championship caliber team, but he can be a #3. Trading him for fungible assets seems unlikely to be the best way to bring in that #2 star, but I am expecting a lot of moving pieces in the coming months.
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
4,809
It's interesting; three different camps seem to be setting up here:

(1) The Celtics absolutely need more talent. And Brown and Tatum aren't as good as we like to think they are, through our green-tinted glasses.

(2) The Celtics need more talent, but mainly to complement Brown and Tatum. They're elite players, but they don't have the right supporting cast.

(3) The Celtics have enough talent, but they just need more effort/consistency/desire/whatever.

Here's an article that I would say is in the #2 group. Personally I think the answer is somewhere between #1 and #2, but mostly #2.
 

CreightonGubanich

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,378
north shore, MA
I've gone from thinking that the Celtics can build a championship contender by adding smart, complementary role players around Tatum and Brown as they improve, to thinking they probably need a bona fide third scorer rather than role players....

To now questioning whether they need to bring in a guy that's better than Jaylen Brown to be the number 2 guy, or a guy better than Tatum to be the number 1. And the last option isn't really possible.

That's why I'm becoming more open to the idea of trading Jaylen Brown. It's not about Brown himself, it's more about the ceiling of Jayson Tatum. At the risk of sounding trite, neither of those guys make anyone else better. At some point, we have to stop faulting the role players for being role players, being excited when the team brings in different role players, and then getting disappointed again. They look good when guys get them open shots, and bad when that doesn't happen.

Every other championship contender has a guy that makes plays for others. We don't.
 

cardiacs

Admires Neville Chamberlain
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,993
Milford, CT
I wonder how close to the cliff we collectively would be if the C's had a better schedule for the first 20 games. I almost wrote how we might already be at the high point of the season before the road trip but thought twice about it.
Personally I am willing to give this team more rope, but if I were to make a change I would be looking at Smart.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,950
Isle of Plum
I've gone from thinking that the Celtics can build a championship contender by adding smart, complementary role players around Tatum and Brown as they improve, to thinking they probably need a bona fide third scorer rather than role players....

To now questioning whether they need to bring in a guy that's better than Jaylen Brown to be the number 2 guy, or a guy better than Tatum to be the number 1. And the last option isn't really possible.

That's why I'm becoming more open to the idea of trading Jaylen Brown. It's not about Brown himself, it's more about the ceiling of Jayson Tatum. At the risk of sounding trite, neither of those guys make anyone else better. At some point, we have to stop faulting the role players for being role players, being excited when the team brings in different role players, and then getting disappointed again. They look good when guys get them open shots, and bad when that doesn't happen.

Every other championship contender has a guy that makes plays for others. We don't.
Sadly this largely charts my perspective as well. I’ve been dead against trading Brown (talent/position of value/upside), but this team seems largely to have hit its ceiling and I don’t see hero riding in on the horizon.

I would now seriously consider trading Brown for someone like Damian, plus whatever sweeteners required. Last year we cut all that dead weight on the roster, this year it’s more coherent but maybe just simply not good.

Perhaps a team lead by Lillard and Tatum, plus parts, would be a more compelling destination for StarX
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Exactly. This team needs another top 30 player, not just swapping one for another. Ideally, it would be a shooter with an alpha personality..but I honestly have no idea who that player is. I think we can all agree that the Marcus Smart as the “heart and soul”/leader experience needs to stop ASSP
And with what assets do you add that player? Every team needs another top 30 player.

Barring some great fortune that nets us this top 30 player with no assets, the way to improve the team is trading Jaylen Brown.

And how long do you wait to add that 3rd star? How many years do you punt waiting for Bradley Beal?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
The Matthews thing I get in a vacuum (ie, you have 2 star wings, you have at times DS, Smart, PP, Nesmith, Romeo, Richardson playing wing too), but... it's part of a pattern for this team, which is, we don't value proven 3pt shooting at the guard/wing positions. Look at our supporting guards/wings....
Smart- Career .318, 1 of 8 seasons over 35%, 4 seasons at or under 30
Schroder: Career .327, 2 of 9 seasons over 35%
Richardson: Career .358, 4 of 7 seasons over 35% (2 of last 3 well under)
So none of our vets are really shooters and 2 of the 3 are VERY BAD for their position.

Nesmith; Career- .335, a pretty good .370 last year but abysmal this year
Romeo: Career- .305, a shocking 40% this year, had shown an upward trend in his 2 terrible seasons
PP- Career- .397, slumping in limited minutes early this year, but only guy you could argue is a proven NBA shooter.